EXAM Flashcards

Question

Parliamentary system

Answer 1

Executive ⬆️ Legislative ⬆️ Voter - Indirect election of Chief Executive (head of gov is Prime Minister) - “Fused power system” (between the two branches of government) -> Limited separation of powers (Ministers, Head of state vs. government) - clear separation between head of state and head of government - Historically - monarchy (Japan, Spain, UK) in comparison to Germany, Italy (who didn't keep the monarchy) - Flexible terms in the office -> Dissolution of parliament/vote of no confidence

Answer 2

Legislature Executive ↖️ voters ↗️ - Popular election of the chief executive - “Separation of power system” (Clear separation of powers) - no separation of head of government and president - Head of state = government - fixed terms in office (no dissolution of office) - Historically - USA (18th), Latin America (19th), Africa/Asia (20th) - Fixed terms in office (No dissolution of the legislature/vote of no confidence)

Answer 3

Semi-presidential (Western Europe, Africa, Asia): - mix - Directly elected president -> Fixed term - Prime Minister -> Responsible to the legislature Variety - Weak president: close to the parliamentary system (ex. Austria) - Powerful president: close to presidential system (ex. Taiwan)

Answer 4

MAJORITARIAN - Facilitate the majority of the rules - Disproportional electoral system -> Discourages voting for smaller parties - Often, a two-party system CONSENSUS - Protect minorities - A coalition of the government - Federalism - Proportional electoral system (voters count for small parties) - Often, a multiparty system

Answer 5

- Over time: definition of citizenship became more inclusive -> Historically, what was widely accepted is, today, morally unacceptable -> Ex. who is able to vote -> potential for future expansion? -> Ex. lowering the voting age - Modern democracy: roughly 200 years old -> Compare to the Roman Republic: lasted 500y -> Byzantine Empire: 1100y -> Ottoman Empire: 600y - Modern democracy is a newcomer -> Cannot take for granted -> Support needed to survive and thrive

Answer 6

- Considered for a long time as a residual category (focus more on democracy) - More variety of research in recent years - General definition: -> “No turnover in the power of the executive” (no meaningful elections) ->Many differences (privilege, no real elections, etc)

Answer 7

1920/30s - new types - Germany/Hitler, Stalin/Soviet Union - Aim to reconstruct society Post WWII: Hanna Arendt - Trying to show how these new, unique, and extreme ideas rose to power - “The origins of totalitarianism” 1973 - Full control, complete domination - 3 dimensions: repression, ideology and propaganda, participation 1. Repression - Omnipresent terror to obtain compliance of citizens - Leader/party/police - Compliance, total control - Concentration camps, purges, show trials - Ex, Cambodia (killed 1/3 of population, torture and arrests, "new society" with murdered elite, burned books, no personal privacy) 2. Ideology and propaganda - to create loyalty to your regime - Legitimacy - Indoctrination (less or not important in authoritarian regimes) 3. Participation - Mass membership of political parties (or similar) - Mass mobilization - Reconstruct society and transform it/its people Ex. North Korea - regime wants mass mobilization - personality cult - indoctrination via media control - heavy repression (gulag, death), total control - no civil liberties

Answer 8

- Not/less important than Totalitarian Regimes - Authoritarian mentalities (Obedient) - Flexible - Small group of supporters - Limited participation for citizens - Demobilize/depolitize apathetic (Ex. North Korea)

Answer 9

- Different regimes/who rules (equally authoritarian) - Minimalist definition -> Strategy, structure - Barbara Gedde’s approach -> Post WW2, the structure is 4 groups (ideal types) -> Personalist, single-party, military, monarchy

Answer 10

- Little restraint of power (one leader can access power with no restrictions) - Weaken the institutions and strong individual, deprofessionalize the military, weaken the legislature and parties - often no strong ideology, rather personality cult, state=leader - inner circle, not to critizize but to confirm (Ex. Gaddafi in Libya) - tend to be quiet durable -> as seen with inner circle of Mobutu in Zaire - Unpredictable (random personal choices in inner circle) - Chaotic aftermath - less likely to democratize

Answer 11

- One party is in control -> No leader can take control over it -> Ex. China, Vietnam, Laos - Institutions are dominant - Other parties: no other parties allowed, or there are other competing parties - Similar to democracies? -> What's different is that the ruling power dominates the legislature and the opposition faces disadvantages and threats in elections -> Ex. Institutional Revolutionary Party in Mexico - tend to last longer

Answer 12

- Military in power - has seized the power, no leader, true power lies in the military as an institution - Ex. Cold War, Latin America - Ruling junta: collective discussion making - rather short duration (often splits within, “go back to barracks”) - after end, democratization is more likely

Answer 13

- Royal Family has the power -> Head of state and other key positions - Ex. Brunei - tend to be very durable -> Veto players, “balance”, discussion -> Maybe also traditions lead to more durability but: monarchies can also be democratic

Answer 14

- Degree of authoritarianism - Grey zone, hybrid regimes -> Degree: democratic/authoritarian - Electoral/competitive authoritarian regime - Democratic façade- non-democratic practice to differ hybrid from pure AR: Elections - There are none - Outcome clear (100%) beforehand (pure A.R) - Not fair (Incumbents vs. opposition, Dominance (but not 100%) (competitive A.R)) - Ex. Hungary - Elections (unfair), parties - Fidesz party (Orbán) Hungary -> Has advantages -> Media controlled -> Judges - Still, some democratic elements (not yet fully authoritarian) Advantages - Gray zone, nuance (not every regime is perfectly authoritarian or democratic) Disadvantages - Implication: les authoritarian = democratization? - One dimension (competitiveness)

Answer 15

4 elements: repression, legitimacy, co-optation, use of “democratic” institutions 1. Repression a. It can happen in various ways - For -> Control, survival -> Eliminate opposition -> Belief: no choice -> Collective action is difficult - Against -> International repressions -> Population -> Lack of information -> Security forces Purges happen at an early stage to eliminate enemies 2. Legitimacy - Via economic performance -> “Modern civilization theory” -> + Taiwan, Republic of Korea -> - Singapore, Vietnam - Via propaganda -> Compliance -> Mass media, education -> Accept w/o asking questions, no alternative views - People are disappointed with the present - People idealize the past - Early period in people's lives: authoritarian socialization when young 3. Co-optation - Loyalty -> By creating links with citizens and the regime elite - Co-opt the opposition -> Interest in regime survival -> Pseudo-oppositon - Co-opt the elite -> Theat; coup -> Make the elite happy 4. Use “democratic” institutions - Elections -> Common-useful -> Rivals, opposition -> Support, information - Political parties -> Common, durability -> Ideology (if), benefits, loyalty -> Meetings, monitor - Legislatures -> Opposition (weak)

Answer 16

- AR tend to have a lower GDP than world average and democracies - tend to perform worse but there is still much variation, but most of the poorest regimes happen to be AR -> - Wealthier AR (rich in oil) -> Famines in AR, ex. China “Great Leap Forward” - personalist worse than one-party

Answer 17

Culture: diffuse phenomenon Political culture - Beleifs - Values - Norms (Un)scientific studies - Systematic data - For example, Representative mass surveys The Civic Culture (Almond and Verba) - “Patterns of orientation towards political objects” Reference populations Collective/individual

Answer 18

Paradigm of political culture - Orientations, etc → political system - Aristotle (350 BC) Social structures (s.s) ⬇️ Subjective beliefs (s.b) ⬇️ Legitimacy of political institutions (l) Two types of situations Hierarchical (s.s) ⬇️ Authoritarian (s.b) ⬇️ Dictatorship (l) Horizontal (s.s) ⬇️ Egalitarian (s.b) ⬇️ Democracy “People power” - Greek city-states “The Authoritarian Personality” (1950) - Weimar republic - WW2/Holocaust Lasswell (1951), Lipset (1959) - Democratic orientation in the population Almond and Verbal (1963): empirical - “Congruence theorem” - Stable political institution = legitimacy beliefs

Answer 19

Standardized surveys, 1980s - World Value Survey, European Values Study Inglehart (1990-97) Inglehart and Welzel (2010) - Robust pattern of differences - Two major dimensions -> Sacred vs. secular values -> Patriarchal vs. emancipative values - Difference between societies -> National dimension, historical paths 1. Secular values - 12 items - Scale 0-1 (most sacred - most secular) - Secular distance from sacred authorities -> Region -> State -> National -> Group norms 2. Emancipative values - 12 items - Scale (0-1) most patriarchal - most emancipative -> Child qualities/autonomy -> Government goals/voice -> Women and men/equality -> Life choices/choice Global cultural difference - National population means position (map) -> Hides: internal differences, individuals in “corners” -> But: dense, “gravity center” Inglehart and Welzel - Historic traditions -> Communist, Confucian, protestant - Phases of modernization -> Industrial, post-industrial -> Reversible (perceived) threats -> Inglehart and Norris (2019), cultural backlash

Answer 20

Defining political parties - Central actors, party leader - Easy to define? Particular/different? Definitions - Burke (1770), Shumpeter (1950), Aldrich (1995), Huckershorn (1985) 1. Objective 2. Methods 3. Competition 4. Autonomy 5. Organization and unity Defining Pol. Parties - Legal dimension - Party laws -> Central to democracy -> Powerful -> Administrative - Ex, Canada Elections Act -> Party in general -> Registered party - Privileges -> Staff, media, billboards, buildings

Answer 21

Several categorizations -> Katz (2023) 4 functions 1. Coordination - Within government - Within society - Between government and society (linkage) 2. Contesting elections - Campaigns - Candidates - Policy positions 3. Recruitment - Recruit (minor, unpaid, hopeless) - Select (important, success) 4. Representation - Spectacle, act, embody

Answer 22

Carmani 2023 - Constellation of parties - Several - Focus: democratic - 3 main elements -> Which parties exist? -> How many and how big? -> How do these behave?

Answer 23

Lipset and Rokkan (1967) - Historical context -> Revolutions (A, B, C…) -> Cleavages (1, 2, 3…) A]]- NATIONAL REVOLUTION (19th) 1. Center-periphery cleavage - Admin. Centralization - Cultural standardization - Parties: regionalist, linguistic - Ex, Scottish National Party 2. State-church cleavage - State: secular institutions - Liberals vs. conservatives - Parties: conservative, religious - Ex, Swiss Catholic Conservative Party, Christian democratic union B]]- INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 3. Rural-urban cleavage - Rural: trade barriers (protectionism) - Urban: free market and low tariffs (liberalism) - Parties: agrarian, farmers - Ex, Finish Center Party 4. Workers-employers cleavage - “Capital” vs “labor” - Basis of left-right - Extreme poverty, socialism - Parties: workers, socialists, social democrats - Ex, Swedish Social Democratic C]]- INTERNATIONAL REVOLUTION (20th) 5. Communism-social cleavage - Division on the left - Soviet Comunist Party - Revolution - Parties: communist - Ex, Parti Communiste Français, Japan’s Communist Party D]]- POST-INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION (20th-21st) 6. Materialism-post materialism cleavage - Inglehart 1977, post WW2 - Younger generation vs. war generation - Social movements - Parties: few, mainly Greens - Ex, Die Grunen, Women’s party (Kvinnalistinn Ireland) 7. Globalization Cleavage - Open society vs closed society - Betz (1994): “winners and losers” - Ignazi (1992), Inglehart and Norris 2018 - Parties: populist - Ex, Freedom Party of Austria (FPO), Alternative für Germany (AFO), Fidesz

Answer 24

- number and size - excluding here single/ hegemonic party systems (ex. China) - four types: dominant-party system, two-party system, multiparty system, bipolar system 1. Dominant-party system - one large party but still competitive elections (free and fair) - one-party government - Ex. Japan, Sweden in 20th cen. 2. Two-party system - two large, dominant parties (ca. 80% of the seats) - balanced, alternate - one-party government - linked to electoral system -> plurality: high threshold - moderated, similar - Ex. USA, Australia 3. Multiparty system - frequent and complex, non of the parties gets more than 50% - Ex. Belgium, Netherlands - coalition governments - election: parties individually - much more likely in proportional representation system - Satori (1976) -> moderate >< (limited ideological distance) -> polarized <> (large ideological distance) 4. Bipolar system - similar to multiparty system -> many parties, coalition governments - similar to two-party system -> colations before elections: electoral alliances, stable - Ex. Italy, Germany in 90s

Answer 25

two-party system: - effective (Government is immediate and stable) - accountable (1 party) multiparty system: - representative (proportional representation: pluralism, minorities) - continuity (consensus, legislation)

Answer 26

How to count? 1. Quantative (numerical): size 2. Qualitative: role 1. Quantative rules: number and size - many and small: fragmented - few and large: concentrated -> Rae's (1971) fractionalization index -> Ex. Brazil 0,94, USA 0,5 - effective number of parties -> Laakso and Taagepera (1979) -> Ex. Brazil 16,4, USA 2 2. Qualitative rules - small parties can be important - Sartori (1976) -> coalition potential -> blackmail potential

Answer 27

Majoritarian -> two-party - mechanical effect: high threshold - psychological effects: -> voters: strategic (smaller parties are much less likely to be voted for) -> parties: merge (parties try to merge) Prop. rep. -> multiparty - mechanical effect: small parties - psychological effects: -> voters: sincere (more likely that people vote for their actual preferences) -> parties: small survive (more courage for smaller parties)

Answer 28

- spatial analysis: two dimensions 1. Left-right, economic dimension - socialism-capitalism axis 2. Cultural axis - GAL-TAN axis -> green, alternative, libertarian vs. traditional, authoritarian, nationalist - established parties new strategy: cultural axis - new competitors: populists

Answer 29

- other terms like Parliament, Congress, Assembly - Focus: democracy (influence, role, “core”, tasks) - Assembly -> “Gathering” of group of people for some purpose -> Ex. school assembly, political assembly Parliament: PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM Executive ⬆️ Legislature ⬆️ Voters - Legislature = parliament (Executive and legislature are together but head of gov and head of state are splitted) - Mutual dependence exec/leg. - Remove from office/dissolve. - “Fused-powers system” - Debate and discuss - ex. Belgium, Germany, Japan, France, Denmark, UK Congress: PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM Legislative executive ↖️Voters ↗️ - Legislature = congress (head of gov is head of state but legislature and executive are splitted) - Selected independently - cannot dissolve/remove - “seperation of power system” - policymaking, conflictual - ex. Argentina, Brasil, USA, Chile, Bolivia, South Korea

Answer 30

- Principal agent theory -> Principal engages agent for specific task -> Agent performs task on behalf of principal -> oversight - Legislature as agent of citizens (1. linkage and representation) - Legislature as principal to executive (2. oversight and control) - Differences 1. Linkage and representation - linkage (links constituency to central government, transfer information) - representation (legislators as delegates vs trustees) - debating (public forum for different interests and values) - legitimation (mobilize support for gov) 2. Control and oversight - control (dependent if powers are separated or fused, if fused then control is necessary) - oversight (important in both systems, develop, pass policies, monitor agencies, different formats like question time, special hearings, investigative committees) - budget control (indirect oversight, "power of the purse", powerful) 3. Policymaking - consultation (present opinion) - delay and veto ("negative power", delay slows down progress, veto to block and change status quo) - amendment and initiation (positive tools, amendment to change executive proposals)

Answer 31

TRANSFORMATIVE LEGISLATURE - direct influence on policymaking - focus on "working" ARENA-TYPE LEGISLATURE - more engaged in linkage and oversight than policymaking - focus on "talking"

EXAM Flashcards

(55 cards)